The post was on a private or personal account. Does that matter?

Not in the way it may seem. The course explains that if you are identifiable as a healthcare professional, your conduct online may be judged professionally, and that privacy settings change, content is shared and screenshots remain. Section 6 covers personal accounts, closed groups, pseudonyms and historic posts, and why relying on them in a response reads as a lack of insight.

I did not name the patient. Can it still be a breach of confidentiality?

Yes. The course treats confidentiality as breached if a patient could reasonably identify themselves — through the timing, the place, a rare condition, an age or an occupation. Section 3 covers identifiability beyond names, images and background screens, and confidentiality after care has ended.

Should I delete the post?

Take advice before you delete anything. The course explains that screenshots may already exist, that deleting content after a complaint can read as evasive, and that investigators may ask about removed content. Section 7 covers deleting posts, accounts or messages, and Section 9 handling a problematic post safely.

A patient sent me a friend request. What does the course say?

Decline it politely, with a neutral explanation, and redirect any contact to official channels. Section 4 covers boundaries with current and former patients online and why connecting with a current patient blurs the professional relationship; Section 3 covers patient-initiated contact.

The complaint is about something I posted about a colleague or my employer. Is that covered?

Yes. Section 4 has a lesson on boundaries with colleagues and employers online — public criticism, internal disputes shared online, mocking workplace situations — and Section 5 covers venting, humour and sarcasm about work.

Should I take advice before I respond?

Yes — before anything is written to the regulator, a committee or your employer. Ask your indemnifier, your union or professional body, or a solicitor to read your response before it is sent, and keep a copy of everything you send. Nothing on this page is legal advice.

Can this course be used as evidence of remediation?

It can be part of the evidence, but no course decides a complaint. It gives you a dated certificate of 2 CPD hours and a structure for a reflection on the lapse. Section 8 covers the other evidence that sits beside it: a written personal social media policy, a record of your account review, and supervisor or mentor attestations.

How long does it take, and how long do I have access?

The course is 2 CPD hours, self-paced, with access for twelve months from purchase. The certificate is issued on completion, dated, with the course title and the CPD hours. Whether the hours count towards your own CPD requirement is for your regulator or scheme to say: doctors must undertake a minimum of 50 hours in each scheme year, and CORU registrants must achieve 30 CPD credits in every 12-month period.

Can I get a certificate with a later date?

No. The certificate records the date you completed the course, and that date does not change. If your regulator, an inquiry committee or an employer asks for recent evidence, you buy the course again: half price within twelve months of your original purchase, the full €100 after that.

Will anyone be told that I am taking the course?

No. Nobody is told you are enrolled. We do not share participant details with any regulator, an employer, a union or an indemnifier; the certificate reaches them only if you attach it to your own response.

Medical Council · NMBI · Dental Council · Pharmaceutical Society of Ireland · CORU · Complaint or fitness to practise inquiry

Social Media Professionalism and Boundaries for Healthcare Professionals facing a complaint to your regulator or a fitness to practise inquiry about something posted, shared or messaged online

A post, a comment, a message or a photograph has led to a complaint?

Confidentiality — a post about a case, with no name but enough detail to identify the patient
Images — a photograph from a clinical area, with a screen, a chart or a badge in the background
Boundaries — a boundaries breach with a patient or a colleague: a friend request accepted, private messages, a dual relationship online
Tone — sarcasm, humour or venting about patients, colleagues or your workplace
Advice — individual clinical advice given by direct message
Public comment — health claims made with your professional title, outside your competence
Deleted posts — posts deleted after the complaint arrived, and the screenshots that remain
Any other concern — about your conduct online, on a personal account or in a closed group

Facing a complaint or a fitness to practise inquiry about your conduct online — before the Medical Council, NMBI, the Dental Council, the Pharmaceutical Society of Ireland or CORU?

This course is for a healthcare professional whose posts, messages or online contact have led to a complaint or a fitness to practise inquiry. This course helps you remediate — and show the remediation, with a dated certificate for your written response, your reflection, an undertaking or an inquiry.

Buy this course — €100 (€70 with Bulk Buy 10) Bulk Buy — from €70 a course

Price by number of courses
Courses	Price per course	You save
1	€100	No saving
2	€88	€25
3	€83	€50
5	€80	€100
10	€70	€300

Add courses. The saving is applied in the basket.

Immediate access · certificate on completion · twelve months' access

2 CPD hours
Self-paced
Written for Ireland
CPD certificate
From €70 a course (Bulk Buy of 10)

Our team

Dr Shehzad IqbalFounder, course author and facilitatorMBBS, MRCS, MRCGP
Dr Mo MirzaCourse facilitatorMedically trained, UCL London
Ludmila UpenieceBusiness development and supportPsychology, UEL London

At a glance

Who it is for: Any healthcare professional in Ireland facing a complaint, an employer process or a fitness to practise inquiry about a post, a message, a photograph or online contact with a patient or a colleague — on a public, personal, anonymous or closed account
Regulator covered: Applies to practitioners registered with the Medical Council, the Nursing and Midwifery Board of Ireland (NMBI), the Dental Council, the Pharmaceutical Society of Ireland (PSI) or CORU
Length: 10 sections, 83 lessons, 2 CPD hours
Format: Self-paced, online, immediate access, twelve months from purchase
Certificate: Certificate issued by Healthcare Ethics Courses on completion, dated, with the course title and 2 CPD hours
Price: €100 · from €70 a course (Bulk Buy of 10)

Certificate issued by Healthcare Ethics CoursesRemediation courses for regulatory processes.

2CPD hours, issued by Healthcare Ethics Courses

10Sections, nine closing with a reflective quiz

83Lessons, plus a post-course assessment

€100 (€70 with Bulk Buy 10)One off. Twelve months' access

Sample certificate of continuing professional development for Social Media Professionalism and Boundaries for Healthcare Professionals, issued by Healthcare Ethics Courses, showing the name John Smith, 2 CPD hours and a date of completion, marked SAMPLE — Sample. Your certificate carries your name, the course title and the date you complete the course.

How healthcare professionals use it

With a written response to your regulator or its preliminary committee, alongside a reflection
When an undertaking or a consent is discussed, or in your evidence to an inquiry committee
As a dated record of remediation for the regulator when sanction is considered

Buy this course — €100 (€70 with Bulk Buy 10)

Facing a complaint about a post

A patient, a family, a colleague or your employer has sent a screenshot to the regulator. Section 7 covers how social media concerns reach a regulator, what is assessed — confidentiality, boundaries, tone and public trust — and how to respond once the concern is raised.

Facing a complaint to your regulator

The Medical Council, NMBI, the Dental Council, the PSI or CORU has written to tell you of a complaint. Your first written reply is where your understanding of what was posted is read first. Section 7 sets out what a response should include.

Relying on a personal account or privacy settings

The post was on a private profile, in a closed group or under a pseudonym, and that was your first answer. Section 6 explains why none of them removes professional responsibility, and Section 7 why it was my personal account reads as a lack of insight.

Facing an employer investigation as well

An employer process and a regulator’s process can run side by side, and the accounts you give in each are compared. Section 7 has a lesson on employer investigations and the concern that inconsistent accounts raise.

Facing an allegation of professional misconduct

A breach of confidentiality, a boundary crossed online, a comment that showed contempt for patients: online conduct is assessed as professional conduct. Section 8 compares weak and strong responses in social media investigations and sets out the remediation and evidence that answer them.

Facing a fitness to practise inquiry

The complaint has gone to a Fitness to Practise Committee, a Professional Conduct Committee or a Health Committee. Remediation completed before the hearing, dated and documented, is evidence you can put before the committee and the regulator.

Patient confidentiality online

No name, but the timing, the place, a rare condition or an age was enough for the patient to identify themselves. Section 3 covers identifiability beyond names, images and background screens, private messaging and closed forums, and confidentiality after care has ended.

Professional boundaries online, with a patient or a colleague

A follow request from a patient accepted, a casual exchange that moved into private messages, a colleague criticised in public, a dual relationship in a small community. Section 4 covers boundaries with patients, former patients and colleagues online, dual relationships and online overlap, and managing boundary crossings early.

Venting, humour and sarcasm

A post written after a difficult shift, a meme about patients, a joke about work. Section 5 explains why venting, humour and sarcasm about work attract complaints, and Section 9 sets out the habits that prevent impulsive posting.

Clinical photographs and case stories

A celebratory photograph from the ward, a learning point from a case seen this week. Sections 3 and 5 cover images from clinical settings and the identifiers hidden in them, and why a teaching intention does not override confidentiality.

Advice and opinions online

Individual advice by direct message, or comment on a health topic under your professional title. Section 5 covers private messaging and individual advice, and commenting outside your competence; Section 4 explains how online advice can create a professional relationship you did not intend.

Personal accounts and privacy settings

Friends only, a closed group, a pseudonym. Section 6 sets out why none of them removes professional responsibility: settings change, content is shared, screenshots remain, and historic posts can be reviewed years later.

Deleting posts after the complaint

Deleting content once a concern is raised can read as evasive, and screenshots may already exist. Section 7 covers the risks of deleting posts, accounts or messages, and why advice comes before any deletion.

The written response

A statement that blames privacy settings, criticises the complainant or says it was only a joke. Section 7 covers writing statements about social media conduct and demonstrating insight, and Section 8 the remediation that answers the concern.

Facing a complaint to your regulator or a fitness to practise inquiry? This course helps you remediate — and show it.

Buy this course — €100 (€70 with Bulk Buy 10)

Ten sections and 83 lessons, with a reflective quiz closing each of the first nine and a post-course assessment at the end.

Show every lesson title

Section 01 · Introduction — Why Social Media Professionalism Matters in Irish Healthcare: What Is Social Media Professionalism in Healthcare?; Why Social Media Use Is a Professional Issue; Social Media and Professional Identity; Social Media and Patient Trust; Regulatory Expectations in Ireland; Common Misconceptions About Social Media Use; Consequences of Poor Social Media Conduct; Why This Course Is Essential.
Section 02 · Professional Identity and Online Behaviour: What Is Professional Identity in the Digital Age?; Personal vs Professional Identity: A False Divide; How Online Behaviour Shapes Public Trust; Tone, Language, and Respect Online; Opinions, Advocacy, and Professional Responsibility; Emotional Posting and Impulsive Behaviour; Professional Boundaries and Self-Disclosure; Consistency Across Platforms; Regulatory Expectations in Ireland.
Section 03 · Confidentiality, Privacy, and Patient Information: Confidentiality as a Core Professional Obligation; Why Social Media Creates Unique Confidentiality Risks; Identifiability Beyond Names; Images, Videos, and Visual Content; Private Messaging, Group Chats, and “Closed” Forums; Responding to Patient-Initiated Online Contact; Confidentiality After Care Has Ended; Common Pitfalls Leading to Breaches; Regulatory Expectations in Ireland.
Section 04 · Professional Boundaries With Patients and Colleagues Online: What Are Professional Boundaries in the Online Context?; Boundaries With Patients on Social Media; Former Patients and Ongoing Risk; Giving Advice or Opinions Online; Boundaries With Colleagues and Employers Online; Emotional Venting and Boundary Erosion; Dual Relationships and Online Overlap; Managing Boundary Crossings Proactively; Regulatory Expectations in Ireland.
Section 05 · High-Risk Social Media Behaviours and Common Pitfalls: Sharing Clinical Experiences, “Learning Points,” or Case Stories; Venting, Humour, or Sarcasm About Work; Commenting on Health Topics Using Professional Status; Engaging With Patient Content Publicly; Private Messaging and Individual Advice; Images From Clinical or Work Environments; Privacy Settings and Platform Changes; Alcohol, Substance Use, and Lifestyle Posts; Responding to Criticism, Reviews, or Online Disputes; Regulatory Expectations in Ireland.
Section 06 · Personal Accounts, Privacy Settings, and Common Misconceptions: The Myth of the “Personal Account”; Why Privacy Settings Do Not Guarantee Safety; False Sense of Security in Closed Groups; “Anonymous” Accounts and Pseudonyms; Deleting Posts and “Clean-Up” After the Fact; Historic Posts and Retrospective Scrutiny; Multiple Platforms and Inconsistent Behaviour; Privacy Settings vs Professional Judgement; Regulatory Expectations in Ireland.
Section 07 · Social Media, Complaints, and Regulatory Investigations: How Social Media Issues Come to Regulatory Attention; What Regulators Assess in Social Media Cases; Employer Investigations and Workplace Consequences; Responding When a Social Media Concern Is Raised; Deleting Posts, Accounts, or Messages: Risks and Missteps; Writing Statements and Responses About Social Media Conduct; Demonstrating Insight in Social Media Investigations; Remediation Following Social Media Concerns; Regulatory Expectations in Ireland.
Section 08 · Reflection, Insight, and Remediation After Online Lapses: Why Reflection, Insight, and Remediation Matter in Social Media Cases; Reflection: Analysing the Online Lapse Honestly; Insight: Recognising Seriousness and Taking Responsibility; Common Online Lapses That Trigger Remediation; Remediation: Turning Learning Into Action; Evidence: Demonstrating Change Credibly; Weak vs Strong Responses in Social Media Investigations; Embedding Learning Into Ongoing Digital Practice; Regulatory Expectations in Ireland.
Section 09 · Applying Safe Social Media Practice to Daily Life: Adopting a “Professional-First” Mindset Online; Practical Posting Rules for Daily Use; Managing Interactions, Comments, and Messages; Separating Teaching Content From Social Media; Reviewing and Managing Digital Footprint Over Time; Managing Stress and Avoiding Impulsive Posting; Handling Mistakes Safely and Professionally; Using Social Media Positively and Safely; Aligning Daily Practice With Regulatory Expectations.
Section 10 · Conclusion and Key Takeaways: Conclusion; Key Takeaways.

Whether it is read by your employer, a preliminary committee or an inquiry committee, a response about online conduct is read for insight. These are the four parts to set out, and what the course gives you for each.

The post shows what happened once; your response shows whether it may happen again.

What was postedThe post, the platform and the audience, described without minimising.Section 8 sets out what a reflection on an online lapse includes, from a factual description of the post to the triggers behind it.
Why it was wrongAgainst your regulator’s standards: confidentiality, boundaries, respect or public trust.Section 7 covers what is assessed in social media cases, and Section 3 why a patient can be identified without a name.
What effect it hadOn the patient, on colleagues and on public trust, including what could have followed.Section 8 has a lesson on insight: recognising seriousness and taking responsibility.
What has changedSpecific to the lapse, dated, and confirmable by someone else.Section 8 covers a personal social media policy, account audits, mentorship and the evidence of change — and this course is a dated item for your portfolio.

No patient was named and my account was private read as reasons, not as insight.

Take advice from your indemnifier, your union or professional body, or a solicitor before you respond to anyone.

Facing a complaint to your regulator or a fitness to practise inquiry? This course helps you remediate — and show it.

Buy this course — €100 (€70 with Bulk Buy 10)

Online conduct is professional conduct

Professional misconduct is a ground of complaint under four of the Acts and a ground for an inquiry under the Dentists Act, and CORU describes it as “any act, omission or pattern of conduct” that breaches the Code (grounds for a complaint). In the cases CORU concluded in 2022 to 2024, confidentiality was a theme in 10% and professional boundaries in 7% (trends report). The course covers confidentiality online (Section 3), boundaries with patients and colleagues online (Section 4), the behaviours that attract complaints (Section 5) and the misconceptions about personal accounts (Section 6).

Insight is read in the response

The Medical Council’s Guidance on Sanctions says a doctor may “demonstrate insight by providing evidence of their understanding of the problem”, and NMBI’s Guidance on Sanctions that “Mere acknowledgement of the findings does not necessarily demonstrate insight”. Section 7 covers writing statements about social media conduct and the signs of a lack of insight, and Section 8 the remediation and evidence that sit beside a statement. Ask your adviser which standard in your own code the complaint engages, and name it in your response. For the stages from the first letter to the High Court, see the fitness to practise process in Ireland, explained.

Read the primary sources

Buy this course — €100 (€70 with Bulk Buy 10)

Dr Shehzad Iqbal

Course author and facilitator, Healthcare Ethics Ireland

Dr Iqbal wrote this course. He combines clinical practice with a formal postgraduate qualification in healthcare law and ethics, and has worked with registrants across the regulated health professions, online and face to face, since 2020.

He founded Probity & Ethics in the United Kingdom in 2020 and Healthcare Ethics Courses, which issues the certificates, in 2025. More about us.

MBBS · MRCS · MRCGP · Postgraduate Certificate in Healthcare Law and Ethics, University of Dundee

Written and reviewed by Dr Shehzad Iqbal. Last reviewed 22 October 2026.

Social Media Professionalism and Boundaries for Healthcare Professionals is a two-hour, self-paced remediation course for healthcare professionals in Ireland — registered with the Medical Council, NMBI, the Dental Council, the Pharmaceutical Society of Ireland or CORU — who face a complaint, an employer process or a fitness to practise inquiry about a post, a message, a photograph or online contact. It covers why social media use is a professional issue; professional identity and online behaviour; confidentiality and identifiability beyond names; boundaries with patients, former patients and colleagues online, including dual relationships; the high-risk behaviours, from case stories and venting to private advice and clinical images; why personal accounts, privacy settings, closed groups and pseudonyms do not remove responsibility; how social media concerns are assessed, and the risks of deleting posts; reflection, insight and remediation after an online lapse; and safe daily habits. Ten sections, the first nine closing with a reflective quiz, a post-course assessment, and a dated certificate from Healthcare Ethics Courses. It is remediation and dated evidence of it; it decides no complaint, and it is not a substitute for advice from your indemnifier, your union or professional body, or a solicitor.

Social media professionalism means applying online the same standards of honesty, integrity, confidentiality, respect and professional boundaries expected in clinical practice. The course defines it that way and applies it to everything a professional does online: public posts, comments, likes and shares; private messages and group chats; closed professional forums; images, videos and livestreams. Its key principle is that there is no meaningful separation between personal and professional conduct online for a regulated healthcare professional (Section 1).

For a complaint, the question is not whether the account was private or the patient named, but whether the post affected confidentiality, a boundary, respect or public trust. The course treats intent as secondary to impact, and treats the response to the concern as part of what is assessed (Sections 7 and 8).

In a written response, describe what was posted and where, say which standard it breached, what effect it had or could have had, and what you have changed, with dated evidence.

The three terms that decide where a complaint goes, and the words the course is built on.

Preliminary Proceedings Committee: The committee of the Medical Council, NMBI, the PSI and CORU that looks at a complaint before any inquiry: it may take no further action, suggest mediation, conclude the matter with an undertaking or a consent where its Act allows, or refer the complaint to an inquiry. At the Dental Council, the Fitness to Practise Committee considers whether there is a prima facie case.
Fitness to practise inquiry: The hearing stage: before the Fitness to Practise Committee at the Medical Council, NMBI and the Dental Council, and before the Professional Conduct Committee or the Health Committee at the PSI and CORU. Any sanction heavier than an advice, admonishment or censure takes effect only when the High Court confirms it.
Professional misconduct: A ground of complaint under the Medical Practitioners, Nurses and Midwives, Pharmacy and Health and Social Care Professionals Acts, and a ground for an application for an inquiry under the Dentists Act. The Dental Council describes it as a serious falling short in the standards expected of a dentist; the PSI as behaviour that goes against its Code of Conduct for registered pharmacists; CORU as any act, omission or pattern of conduct that breaches the Code.

Identifiability, digital footprint and the other terms the course uses

Social media professionalism: Applying the same standards of honesty, integrity, confidentiality, respect and professional boundaries online as in clinical practice.
Identifiability: Whether a patient could be identified from a post without a name: through timing, place, a rare condition, age, occupation or family circumstances. The course treats confidentiality as breached if a patient could reasonably identify themselves.
Context collapse: Content reaching audiences the person posting did not expect, beyond the audience they had in mind.
Dual relationship: A professional relationship and a personal one at the same time, such as treating acquaintances who interact with you online, or family friends in a small community. The course covers declaring the conflict and keeping communication boundaries clear.
Boundary crossing: A step beyond the professional relationship — a follow request accepted, a private message thread — that can escalate gradually. Section 4 covers managing boundary crossings early.
Digital footprint: Everything a professional has posted over time, including historic posts that can be reviewed years later. The course recommends reviewing it periodically without relying on privacy settings.
Personal social media policy: A professional’s own written rules for posting, messaging and patient contact; after a lapse, evidence of sustained change.
Insight: Recognising why the online behaviour was inappropriate and accepting responsibility for its effect.
Remediation: Practical, targeted steps that reduce future risk: relevant to the lapse, proportionate, sustained and verifiable.

Ireland’s five health regulators each work under their own Act, all five amended by the Regulated Professions (Health and Social Care) (Amendment) Act 2020. These are the sections that say who may complain, on what grounds, and who looks at the complaint first.

Also engaged: Sanctions — advice, admonishment or censure, conditions, suspension and cancellation (erasure under the Dentists Act): Medical Practitioners Act s.71, Nurses and Midwives Act s.69, Dentists Act ss.39 to 41, Pharmacy Act s.48, Health and Social Care Professionals Act s.66 · High Court confirmation — the heavier sanctions take effect only when the High Court confirms them; an advice, admonishment or censure on confirmation or once the appeal window of 21 or 30 days passes without an appeal · The 2020 Act — the Regulated Professions (Health and Social Care) (Amendment) Act 2020, which amended all five Acts in stages from 2021 to 2025.

Each regulator has its own Act and its own names for the stages, and your letter tells you which stage you are at. At each of them the same three things are worth showing in writing: that you see what went wrong, that you understand it against your regulator’s code, and what you have changed, with dated evidence.

The complaint and the grounds
Anyone may complain, including the regulator itself. Under the Medical Practitioners Act and the Nurses and Midwives Act the complaint goes to the chief executive officer; under the Pharmacy Act it may be made by or on behalf of any person or by the registrar; under the Health and Social Care Professionals Act by or on behalf of any person or by a registration board. Under the Dentists Act the Council or any person applies to the Fitness to Practise Committee for an inquiry. Professional misconduct is a ground of complaint under the four other Acts and, under the Dentists Act, a ground for an application for an inquiry.
The preliminary stage
The Medical Council, NMBI, the PSI and CORU each have a Preliminary Proceedings Committee. At the Medical Council the chief executive officer looks at a complaint first and may assign an Authorised Officer, and the committee decides whether there is enough cause to take further action. At NMBI the committee may refer a complaint to the Fitness to Practise Committee for a sworn oral inquiry, or suggest mediation or informal resolution; at the PSI it may refer a complaint to a committee of inquiry or to mediation; at CORU it screens out complaints that are trivial, vexatious, without substance or made in bad faith. At the Dental Council, the Fitness to Practise Committee considers whether there is a prima facie case.
Undertakings, consents and mediation
A complaint can be concluded by agreement in some cases. At the Medical Council’s preliminary stage a doctor may be asked to undertake not to repeat the conduct, or to consent to censure (2025 procedures). At NMBI in 2024, 12 undertakings or consents concluded matters at the preliminary stage and the Fitness to Practise Committee recommended 32 (State of Complaints 2024). Undertakings were the largest single Committee of Inquiry outcome in the cases CORU concluded in 2022 to 2024: 13, against 7 censures (trends report). In 2024 the Dental Council accepted undertakings from a dentist instead of making a High Court application (Annual Report 2024). Mediation at NMBI and CORU needs the consent of both sides.
The inquiry
The inquiry committee is the Fitness to Practise Committee at the Medical Council, NMBI and the Dental Council, and the Professional Conduct Committee or the Health Committee at the PSI and CORU. At NMBI allegations against a nurse or midwife must be proven beyond reasonable doubt. Medical Council inquiries are held in public unless the Council decides on a hearing in private or part private (Medical Council); CORU says its Professional Conduct Committee hearings are normally held in public and its Health Committee hearings normally in private.
The sanction and the High Court
Sanctions run from advice, admonishment or censure (admonishment or censure at the PSI and CORU) through conditions and suspension to cancellation, called erasure under the Dentists Act (MPA s.71, NMA s.69, Dentists Act s.39, Pharmacy Act s.48, HSCP Act s.66). The heavier sanctions take effect only when the High Court confirms them; an advice, admonishment or censure takes effect on confirmation or once the appeal window passes without an appeal: 21 days for doctors, nurses, midwives and dentists, 30 days for pharmacists and CORU registrants (MPA s.74, NMA s.72, Dentists Act s.41, Pharmacy Act s.50, HSCP Act s.68).
Interim measures and your first reply
Separately, the Medical Council says interim suspension is possible under section 60 of the Medical Practitioners Act 2007; where there is a serious and immediate risk, the PSI’s Council can seek suspension from the High Court; and the Dental Council may apply to the High Court for suspension under section 44 of the Dentists Act. None of the five regulators publishes a fixed deadline for a first reply: the Medical Council gives not less than two weeks to respond to an Investigation Report, and NMBI says you may request an extension of time. Take advice before you reply.

Facing a complaint to your regulator or a fitness to practise inquiry? This course helps you remediate — and show it.

Buy this course — €100 (€70 with Bulk Buy 10)

A complaint about a post can raise confidentiality, boundaries and insight together. These are the courses that pair with this one.

Confidentiality in Healthcare Practice

What confidentiality covers, everyday risks and breaches, information sharing, digital records, and remediation after a confidentiality lapse.